this True Body and Blood Where That the Bread and Wine are upon Consecration turn'd into the True Body and Blood of Christ c. Which truly are Where 's indeed and one should think that so many Where 's were not without a Wherefore And because the Gentleman desires to know the Where he shall also know the When Mat. 26.26,27,28 Jesus took BREAD and Blessed it and Brake it and gave it to the Disciples and said TAKE EAT THIS IS MY BODY and He took the CVP and gave Thanks and gave it to them saying Drink ye All of It for THIS IS MY BLOOD And There it was and Here it is by Power of these Words of God THIS IS MY BODY THIS IS MY BLOOD that the Bread and Wine are turn'd into the Body and Blood of Christ He doth no say Here as He did when He spake the Parable of the DOOR the VINE and the rest That this Parable spake He unto them or that this BREAD is Like or Likened unto his BODY or a Figure of his BODY but absolutely TAKE EAT THIS IS MY BODY And for such we ought to take it and believe it till the Protestant Answerer be able to produce as plain Scripture against it as I have done for it The Gentleman proceeds and Pag. 11. tells you what their Church holds he should have said of the Real Presence for that was the Quaere and delivers their Opinion in different manners to wit 1. Our Church holds says he That Transubstantiation is Repugnant to the plain Words of Scripture and overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament Art. 28. 2. That the Sacramental Bread and Wine remain after Consecration in their natural Substances and the natural Body and Blood of Christ are in Heaven and not Here. Rubr. after the Com. 3. That the Body of Christ is Given Taken and Eaten in the Supper only after an Heavenly and Spiritual manner and the means whereby the Body of Christ is Received and Eaten is Faith Art. 28 29. And in three Lines after he tells you That there is no other Substance distributed among the Communicants than that of Bread and Wine And these put together make such a Medley that a Man knows not what to believe of it First 'T is Repugnant to the plain Words of Scripture tho' they are not able to produce one Syllable out of the whole Bible to disprove it Secondly The Natural Body and Blood of Christ are in Heaven and not Here tho' at the same time they tell you That the Body of CHRIST who had but One Body is Given Taken and Eaten in the Supper after an Heavenly and Spiritual manner and in Three Lines after denies it again which are such Contradictions that a Bushel of Figures will ne're reconcile 'em For If the Body and Blood of Christ be confin'd in Heaven and not in the Sacrament at all How can the Body of Christ be Given Taken and Eaten in the Supper after any manner Heavenly or Vnheavenly if the Body of Christ be not There at all to be Given Taken or Eaten or how can the Body of Christ be as he says Given Taken and Eaten in the Supper when at the same time he tells you There is no other Substance distributed to the Communicants than that of Bread and Wine As to the Words Heavenly and Spiritual Manner I would They did truly believe it so for then They would believe it as We do that is That the Body of Christ is truly Given Taken and Eaten in the Sacrament after an Heavenly and Spiritual Manner for after a Carnal Sensual Manner We receive it not but this Heavenly and Spiritual Manner We believe to be a True and Real Manner and not a Deceitful Figurative Fictitious Manner as if all that is Heavenly were but Figure and Fancy If You grant the Body and Blood of Christ to be in the Sacrament after a Spiritual Manner you must also grant it There after a True Manner or to be There after a Spiritual Manner is not to be There after a Real Manner If Christ be There in Spirit He is also There in Truth and if There in Spirit and Truth all my Arguments are granted by the Gentleman 's own Concessions as well as Mine Of CHRIST's being Not but where he is Intire Wherefore if Christ be in the Sacrament after any Manner He is There after such an Intire Real and Substantial Manner as We believe and profess Him or He is in no Manner There at all for Christ is Not at all but where He Truly and Intirely is In the Twelfth and Thirteenth Pages of the Protestant Answer the Gentleman produceth all the Scriptures he had or at least all the chiefest Texts he could to disprove our Doctrine of the Real Presence and Being of CHRIST's BODY and BLOOD in the Sacrament Which Scriptures by Him produced Against it together with those by Me alledged and assigned For it are as followeth The Catholick Texts for the Real Presence I. St. John 6. v. 48. I am that Bread of Life says Christ II. Vers 49. Your Fathers did eat Manna in the Wilderness and are Dead III. Ver. 50. This is the Bread which cometh down from Heaven that a Man may Eat thereof and not Die. IV. Vers 51. I am the Living Bread which came down from Heaven If any Man Eat of this Bread he shall Live for ever and the Bread that I will give is my Flesh which I will give for the Life of the World. V. Vers 54. Whoso Eateth my Flesh and Drinketh my Blood hath Eternal Life and I will raise him up at the last Day VI. Vers 55. For my Flesh is Meat indeed and my Blood is Drink indeed VII Vers 56. He that Eateth my Flesh and Drinketh my Blood dwelleth in Me and I in Him. VIII Vers 57. As the Living Father hath sent Me and I live by the Father so he that Eateth Me even he shall Live by Me. IX Vers 58. This is that Bread which came down from Heaven Not as your Fathers did eat Manna and are Dead He that Eateth of this Bread shall Live for ever X. St. Matt. 26. v. 26. And as they were Eating Jesus took Bread and Blessed it and brake it and gave it to the Disciples and said Take Eat This is my Body XI Vers 27. And he took the Cup and gave Thanks and gave it to them saying Drink ye all of it XII Vers 28. For This is my Blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the Remission of Sins XIII St. Mark 14. v. 22. And as they did Eat Jesus took Bread and Blessed and brake it and gave to them and said Take Eat This is my Body XIV Vers 23. And He took the Cup and when he had given Thanks he gave it to them and they all Drank of it XV. Vers 24. And He said unto them This is my Blood of the New Testament which is shed for many XIV St. Luk. 22. v. 19.
of the Church for the true Sense and Meaning thereof But if so as we must go to the Determination of the Church for the Sense of Scripture what then becomes of their Bible-only Rule-of-Faith The Gentleman go's on and Pag. 5. adviseth You to Consult even Those who are most concern'd and particularly says he The Author of your Catholick Answer who has Vndertook what the abovesaid Learned Persons despair'd of to Prove Transubstantiation to the full of your Request by Express and Plain Texts of Scripture And in the same Page tells you Your Catholick Answerer it seems has Read That which Cardinal Bellarmine had not seen and that he had found out a great Part of a Chapter which the Cardinal had Over-look'd But to turn his own Cannon upon Himself I may with more Truth Retort on him That he has Read it seems in my Answer what I never Writ and has found a great part thereof for which You and I are yet to Stek For I do not find the Word Transubstantiation so much as Mentioned in either your Request or my Answer for Justification whereof I refer to Both Wherefore how Sincere the Gentleman has been in this particular let the World Judge Indeed the Title of my Answer says Proving the Real Presence by Scripture only and so doth the Current throughout the whole Discourse but not one Word of Transubstantiation For that the Controversie was not about the Word Transubstantiation but about the Real Presence or Substance Believed and Deny'd in the Sacrament But here you 'll say perhaps What 's this to the Purpose Is not the Real Presence and Transubstantiation all as one No truly they are not so all one as you may think For there is a great deal of difference betwixt a Man and the Name by which he is distinguish'd and the Measures that are taken to prove him a Man are not the same with Those which are us'd to prove his Name is Thomas And so of the LORD's Supper 'T is one thing to prove the Real Presence and Being of CHRIST's Body and Blood in the Sacrament and 't is Another to shew Reasons why this Mysterious Change of Bread and Wine into the Body and Blood of CHRIST is by the Church call'd TRANSVBST ANTIATION though whoever believes the One can't in Truth deny the Other For if what our Saviour said when Matth. 26. Vers 26. JESVS took Bread and blessed it and brake it and gave it to the Disciples and said TAKE EAT THIS IS MY BODY be true That it was as He said his Body then it implies a Change from its former being Bread to its present being his Body And this Mysterious Change the Holy Catholick Church doth properly call TRANSVBST ANTIATION Not that the Substance of Bread is Changed according to Sensual Taste but according to Divine Faith in JESVS CHRIST Wherefore the Gentleman methinks should not have Banter'd altogether as he doth at the Word TRANSVBST ANTIATION but have spoke to the Substance and have either Confess'd the REAL PRESENCE or have produc'd nothing but SCRIPTVRE to Disprove it as was Requested The Gentleman proceeds notwithstanding and tells you Pag. 6. That this Discourse of our Saviour 's meaning That in the 6th Chapter of St. John had no special Reference to the Sacrament for that the Sacrament was not Instituted till says he above a Year after as the Time of this Discourse shews Vers 4 c. Very well On which please to remark That the Sacrament was not then Instituted I grant as I did before in my Answer Pag. 6. where I said First I prove Christ 's Promise before He Instituted the Sacrament c. and so far the Gentleman might have spar'd his Labour But that the Sacrament was not Instituted till above a Year after is what he can shew no Rule for For the Text which he cites to prove his Assertion is this John 6. Vers 4. And the Passover a Feast of the Jews was nigh Now that this word Nigh should signifie Above a Year after is such a Figure as never was Whereas St. Luke hath the same Word saying Chap. 22. Vers 1. Now the Feast of Vnleaven'd Bread drew Nigh which is called the PASSOVER and immediately the Passover followed as appears by the Chapter And St. Mark treats not of the Passover till within Two Days of it saying Chap. 14. Vers 1. After Two Days was the Feast of the Passover So St. Matth. 26. Vers 2. Ye know that after Two Days is the Feast of the Passover c. I do not say That the Word Nigh in St. John signifies so near as Two Days nor do I find by express and plain Scripture that it is to be taken for above a Year after But whether what 's said in the 6th Chapter of St. John have any Reference to the Sacrament is the Quaery For though our Saviour did not then Institute the Sacrament yet He says Vers 51. And the Bread which I will give is my Flesh which I Will give for the Life of the World. By which You see that though He did not then give us this Bread yet He promis'd He would give us Bread to Eat which should be the very same Flesh which he would and afterwards did give for the Life of the World. Now Whether this absolute Promise hath any Reference to the ensuing Performance be You the Judge when at his Last Supper He took Bread and blessed it and brake it and gave it to his Disciples and said TAKE EAT THIS IS MY BODY If therefore this Bread which He here gives us to Eat saying TAKE EAT THIS IS MY BODY be not that Bread which He promis'd He would give us to Eat which should be his Flesh pray ask your Protetestant Answerer Where When and How did CHRIST give us Bread to Eat which should be his Flesh if This be it not The Gentleman goes on and Pag. 7. tells You These Verses viz. 53 54 55 56 57. do shew where our Saviour saith EXCEPT YE EAT and WHOSO EATEIH c. in all which the Present Time is spoken of But why the Gentleman should begin at Vers 53. and thereby skip Vers 51. I know not where CHRIST told them before That He WOVLD in the Future Tense give them Bread to Eat which should be his Flesh and then tells them That EXCEPT THEY DID EAT and WHOSO EATETH c. Not that He did then GIVE or that they did then EAT his Flesh or DRINK his Blood which they could not do before He took it blessed it brake it and gave it For at that Time when He spake as in the 6th Chapter of St. John He only told Them He WOVLD give it and the Eve before his Passion He PERFORM'D it And from that Time I suppose the Obligation bears force Vers 53. That Except ye EAT the FLESH of the Son of Man and DRINK his BLOOD ye have no Life in you He doth not say Except ye EAT it before I GIVE it but first
said He WOVLD give it and then EXCEPT THEY DID EAT c. The Gentleman however from the above-mention'd Texts insinuates That CHRIST's Flesh and Blood may be Eaten and Drank out of the Sacrament as says he is evident from the Sense and Letter of it If so then continues he it could not be understood of that Flesh and Blood which the Bread and Wine are Converted into in the Sacrament nor adds he of Carnal Eating his Flesh and Drinking his Blood. As to his Carnal Eating We beg his Pardon if he means as we Eat Beef and other Meats For that We Truly and Really Receive the Body and Blood of CHRIST in the Sacrament to use his own Words Pag. 12. after an Heavenly and Spiritual manner And so far We should Agree did We not Differ in This That They Receive it in Figure and Fancy only and We Receive it in Substance and Truth But that 't is evident as he says from the Letter and Sense of it That the Flesh and Blood of CHRIST may be Eaten out of the Sacrament and even Before it was Instituted c. is indeed such a Figure as none but Himself can unriddle For my part I have read St. John on this Occasion and I can't find it so evident as he says it is Pray Sir do you Consult the Words and see whether those Texts do imply the Eating and Drinking the Flesh and Blood of CHRIST Out of the Sacrament as well as In it or in any other manner than under the Forms of Bread and Wine according to both the Promise and Institution Or Whether they could Eat it before He Gave it For in the 6 th Chapter of St. John CHRIST did not give them his Flesh to Eat nor his Blood to Drink But told them He would give them BREAD to Eat which should be his FLESH but before He GAVE it 't was impossible for them to EAT it He further proceeds and tells You Pag. 8. That it must not be Properly and Litterally understood For then says he all that thus Properly Eat and Drink the Flesh and Blood of CHRIST would have Eternal Life according to our Saviour's Assertion Vers 54. Very true The Worthy Receivers who persevere to the End have so but the Vnworthy quite contrary And we can shew You a Rule for it viz. 1 Cor. 11.27,29 Wherefore whosoever shall Eat this BREAD and Drink this CUP of the Lord Vnworthily shall be guilty of the Body and Blood of the Lord For he that Eateth and Drinketh UNWORTHILY Eateth and Drinketh Damnation to himself not discerning the LORD 's BODY Wherefore the Worthy may receive to Eternal Life and the Vnworthy to Eternal Death And the Words TAKE EAT THIS IS MY BODY may be properly understood the Protestant Musl-bee's to the contrary notwithstanding The Gentleman tells you further in the same Page That then the Sacrament in both Kinds will be necessary to Salvation c. As to this of Both Kinds it doth not properly Relate either to Your Request or My Answer but is a Controversie deserving to be Argued by it self in convenient Time and Place And besides I do not see where the necessity lies of defining the Sacrament in Both Kinds to One that believes it in Neither not but that I am ready to satisfie You in this particular where and when You please The Gentleman Pag. 8. sharply reflects upon what I said in my Answer p. 8. That if they went to Figures and Parables we knew how to handle them From whence he Insinuates some Extraordinary way of handling For my part I take GOD to Witness I had no other meaning in it than to handle them by the BIBLE as I said to Rule them by their own Rule Wherefore let the Evil be to them that think it As to what he says Pag. 8. Of the Antipathy I should have to Figures and Parables and Cross my Self where-ever they are Named I do not see by what I have Writ where the Gentleman can have the least Ground for this Cross and Antipathous Reflection For to the contrary I highly venerate those Discourses wherein our Saviour was often pleased to express himself by way of Parable c. But that which I abhor and which indeed would make a Saint Bless himself is To see Men mould GOD's Word into what Form they please and make every thing a Figure that doth not square with their Fancy Is it because our Saviour spake some things by way of Parable that All he said was such or That he never spake otherwise If so and that the Scriptures are so full of secret Meanings How comes it that mean Capacities are by the Church of St. Martins left to themselves to Judge of the true sence of Scripture according to D. T. who tells you in his True Account of a Conference p. 18. That a Man after using all Christian means and the help of all Ministerial Guides possible must at last Judge for himself A special Assertion indeed which if true What need of Teachers seeing that every Man must teach himself by being a Judge of the Text to himself at last But not to detain you on this particular Let us come to what the Gentleman desires pag. 8. That I should tell him without a Figure what is that Meat which endureth to everlasting Life whereof our Saviour speaks in the Sixth Chapter of St. John vers 27. Labour not for the Meat which Perisheth but for THAT MEAT which endureth unto everlasting Life which the Son of Man shall give unto you for him hath God the Father sealed Why truly for my part I do not see where the difficulty lies in these words of Labouring for that Meat which endureth to everlasting Life which the Son of Man shall give unto you it being but a Preamble to what immediately follows in the same Chapter of Giving us his FLESH to EAT which is the true Meat that endureth unto everlasting Life And besides He tells us That the Meat which endureth unto everlasting Life should be given us by the Son of Man agreeable to what he says vers 51 55. And the BREAD that I will give is my FLESH which I will give for the Life of the World For my FLESH is Meat indeed and my BLOOD is Drink indeed which without a Figure I humbly conceive is that MEAT which endureth unto everlasting Life As to his How the Son was Sealed by the Father and the rest of his How 's they are such Jewish expressions as that all Christian-pretenders ought to be ashamed of them For CHRIST no sooner spake of this Doctrine of giving us his FLESH to Eat but the Jews came up with their How too saying vers 52. How can this Man give us his FLESH to Eat So Jewish it is to question GOD how he could do it how this how that and if How he made the World of Nothing be asked Can we Answer but by his sole Word And shall it not be sufficient for us to
take his Word when he tells us The Son of Man was Sealed of GOD the Father and Believe him without calling of GOD to question How or diving into the secrets of Heaven So How he came down c. and the rest of his How 's if they are not sufficiently plain in the Bible so as to be clearly understood I 'll agree with the Gentleman and submit to the determination of the Church and so must YOV and all the SEEKERS in England if what the Protestant Answerer Insinuates be true For if these express and plain words of Christ be a Figure where he says as plain as plain can be That he would give us BREAD to Eat which should be his FLESH and accordingly He took Bread and Blessed it and Brake it and gave it saying TAKE EAT THIS IS MY BODY I say if these words are Figurative and must not be properly understood I see no Reason why the whole Bible should not be a Figure too For if ever CHRIST was Plain in any thing 't was in this especially in a Point wherein there was never more occasion to Expound if a Figure than when the Jews to whom He came murmur'd and said How can this Man give us his Flesh to Eat and when some of the Disciples said It was an hard saying who could hear it and thereupon walked no more with Him He that in Cases of less Moment always explain'd his Parables should yet be Dark and Figurative in This of that Importance which occasioned not only the Murmuring of the Jews and Departure of the Disciples Then but also occasions as CHRIST well foresaw our differences at This Day Should He I say explain Himself in matters of less weight and yet be Dark in this great Concern is what would be contrary to his Wisdom and Goodness But so far was CHRIST from meaning otherwise than plainly as he spake that to the murmuring Jews he confirms it vers 53. with a Verily verily I say unto you Except ye EAT the FLESH of the Son of Man and DRINK his BLOOD ye have no Life in you and to the Unbelieving Disciples vers 61 62. with a Doth this offend you What if ye shall see the Son of Man ascend up where he was before Whereas when he spake by Parables He explain'd himself to them as Mat. 13.3 And he spake many things to them in Parables saying Behold a Sower c. or when he spake by way of Similitude as Mat. 18.23 Therefore is the Kingdom of Heaven LIKENED unto a certain King. Mat. 20.1 For the Kingdom of Heaven is LIKE unto a Man that is an Housholder Mat. 22.1,2 And JESUS answered and spake unto them again by PARABLES and said The Kingdom of Heaven is LIKE unto c. Mat. 23.1 Then shall the Kingdom of Heaven be LIKENED unto Ten Virgins c. See Mark 4.2 Mark 12.1 Luke 12.16 Luke 13.18,19 Luke 15.3 Luke 19.11 Luke 20.9 and you 'll find that in all Cases CHRIST spake not by PARABLES without telling them it was so and Expounding the same unto them But because the Gentleman is more particular pag. 22. upon that of CHRIST's being a Door a Vine a Rock c. let 's see whether the Parity 'twixt I am the DOOR the VINE c. be the same with The BREAD that I will give is my FLESH which I will give for the Life of the World or with what he said at his Last Supper when He took BREAD and Blessed it and Brake it and Gave it and said TAKE EAT THIS IS MY BODY without ever Explaining a Syllable to the contrary Whereas in that of the DOOR John 10. the Text tells us It was a PARABLE saying Vers 6. This PARABLE spake JESUS unto them c. Wherefore if the Protestant Answerer would be so kind as to produce as plain Scripture for this of the Sacrament's being a Figure as I have done for the Door 's being a Parable he 'll doubtless oblige YOV and certainly gain a Proselyte of ME. And in like manner of the Vine CHRIST saith Joh. 15.1 I am the True VINE and my Father is the Husbandman as before Mat. 20.1 where he likened the Kingdom of Heaven to a Man that is an Housholder and so goes on Explaining the same saying Vers 4. As the Branch cannot bear fruit of it Self except it abide in the VINE no more can ye except ye abide in ME which if you read the Chapter you 'll find to be more plain And in like manner of the ROCK That he was the CORNER STONE upon which the Foundation was laid and no other Foundation can any Man lay than what CHRIST has lay'd for on Him is Built the whole structure of our Salvation Wherefore whether these Parables of the DOOR the VINE c. be as plain as TAKE EAT THIS IS MY BODY be You or any Impartial Soul the Judge in his own Conscience As to what he says Pag. 9. That if the Words are Literally to be understood they would rather Infer the Conversion of Christ's Flesh and Blood into Bread and Wine For Proof whereof let 's go to the Words of Conversion themselves Mat. 26.26,27,28 where it is said Christ took Bread and Blessed it and Brake it and gave it and said Take Eat This is My BODY he doth not say Take Eat my BODY is this BREAD And in like manner of the CVP For this is my Blood which Words This is my BODY This is my BLOOD are the Words of Conversion and do no ways imply a Change of Christ's Flesh into Bread nor of his Blood into Wine but to the contrary they plainly Infer the Conversion of Bread and Wine into both the Body and Blood of Christ As to the Texts he brings from the 6th of St. John there was no Conversion then made nor do They make for him Besides that he who but just now Pag. 6. of his Answer told us That this Discourse in St. John had no special Reference to the Sacrament should now apply them notwithstanding is an odd way of shifting however as 't is these are the Words John 6.48,55 I am that Bread of Life For my Flesh is Meat indeed and my Blood is Drink indeed Had the Words been My Flesh is Bread indeed as the Gentleman would fain have them if you observe it Pag. 6. then indeed he would have had something of his side but as they are they make clear against him As to those Words ver 48. I am that Bread of Life methinks they are sufficiently explained by the following Texts where he says v. 50. This is the Bread which cometh down from Heaven ver 51. I am the Living Bread c. which Bread he tells us plainly is his Flesh saying Ver. 51. And the Bread that I will give is my Flesh and not that the Flesh which He would give was Bread But that That Bread was his Flesh which as said is sufficiently plain if not rather than differ I 'll joyn in Opinion with
more ample for believing the Latter to be the Body and Blood of CHRIST than for believing the Formers to be the Holy Ghost As to the Eight last Texts which the Gentleman has produc'd to disprove our Doctrine of the Real Presence to wit Act. 1. v. 11. Act. 3. v. 21. St. Luk. 24. v. 39. Act. 1. v. 3. 1 Joh. 1. v. 1. Heb. 9. v. 28. Heb. 10. v. 12. Phil. 3. v. 21. they no way relate to the Sacrament but to the Resurrection and Ascension of CHRIST's Body From whence he concludes That CHRIST is confin'd in Heaven only and can be no where else till He comes to judge the Quick and the Dead and of consequence fixt at the Right Hand of the Father and cannot be as We suppose in Heaven and Earth in so many Places at the same Time. Which barren Conceit of CHRIST is sufficiently Answer'd Pag. 15 16. where it is prov'd from Scriptures That although CHRIST Ascended and be in Heaven yet it argues not but that He is and may be on Earth too For That He is a Perfect and an Omnipotent GOD and has promis'd Mat. 28. v. 20. That He will be with us always even to the End of the World And Mat. 18. v. 20. That Where Two or Three are gather'd together in his Name that He is in the midst of them And further it appears That our Saviour is not so Confin'd in Heaven as that He cannot also be upon Earth for we read That He Descended and overthrew Saul in the Way to Damascus and spoke to him saying Act. 9. v. 4 5. Saul Saul why persecutest thou me And he said Who art thou Lord And the Lord said I am JESVS whom thou persecutest Wherefore the Gentleman's Notion of CHRIST's being only in Heaven you see is frivolous for that CHRIST not only spake with Saul in the High-way but has promis'd as before To be with us always even to the End of the World. And it 's further prov'd That CHRIST may be actually Present without being Seen For when He spake to Saul the Men that Travell'd with him to Damascus stood by Act. 9. v. 7. speechless hearing a Voice but seeing no Man. By all which it 's plain That CHRIST may be on Earth and in many Places at the same Time as well as in Heaven or else He could not be with us always even to the End of the World nor with Saul in the Way nor in the Midst of all the Assemblies of the Faithful that are gather'd together in his Name in so many Places throughout the World at one and the same Time. The Gentleman's Arguments are therefore of no Effect which P. 15 16. he brings to prove Christ only in Heaven and no where else For although those Texts do prove the Resurrection Ascension and Being of CHRIST in Heaven yet they do not at all destroy the Power of CHRIST's being in divers Places at the same Time according to his Divine Will. And please to note That it is impossible for any thing to be in the Will which is not in the Power of GOD. Wherefore as it was in his Will proved by his Word to give us Bread to Eat which should be his Flesh so it was in his Power that That Bread should be his Flesh tho no more Tasted in the Sacrament than Seen when He spake unto Saul And that He whose Greatness the Heavens are not able to contain had both the Power and the Will to be Conceived in the Womb of the Blessed Virgin contrary to the Course of Nature where from almost Nothing He encreased to be Born a Child-God and to Die a God-Man and in whose Power it was to pass with his Body Intire through Walls or Doors that were close in his Power likewise it is to be Contained in the smallest Particle of Bread. Wherefore with the Believing Disciples let us Believe and not with the Murmuring Jews Doubt how he could give us his Flesh to Eat and his Blood to Drink nor with the Incredulous Disciples say 'T is an hard Saying who can hear it nor for this Cause go back as they did and walk no more with CHRIST as They do who deny the Being of his Body and Blood in the Sacrament so expresly confirmed by Him in whose Word there is no Contradiction Wherefore the Defect is not in the Word but in the Carnal Imagination of Those who have not Faith to Believe it nor Scripture to Disprove it nor is it Hard but to the Obstinate nor Incredible but to the Incredulous Wherefore to conclude I humbly submit the whole to your Prudent Consideration and Remind You of your Resolution Pag. 5. That You would be either Catholick or Protestant as the Verdict upon this Tryal should go and that the Success should depend upon the Evidence which Evidence in your Opinion was the Bible and that whoever produced the fullest and clearest Testimony had the Truth on his side Wherefore as you Value the Eternal safety of your Soul please seriously to distinguish and Peruse the Texts which I have assigned for it and those which the Protestant Answerer has brought against it and I doubt not but it will appear That the Scriptures assigned on the Catholick part are abundantly Expressive and Plain for the Being of Christ's Body and Blood in the Sacrament and that the Scriptures produced on the Protestant part are also Expresly for it or not at all against it For that what I have offer'd is the Express Word of GOD who promising said That the Bread which He would give was his Flesh which He would give for 〈◊〉 Life of the World and performing Took Bread Blessed it Brake it 〈◊〉 gave it saying Take Eat This is My Body which Words of Promise aâ—… Performance are Positive and have never yet by Divine Authority bâ—… contradicted for that 't is impossible to produce one Syllable out of tâ—… whole Bible to prove the contrary Wherefore seeing that Protestaâ—… cannot prove by Express Scripture That the Bread which Christ Blâ—…sed and gave at his Supper was not his Flesh and that Catholicks caâ—… and do that it was I hope You will be so much the more convinc'd 〈◊〉 believe the REAL PRESENCE by how much the Words of GOâ—… are more powerful than the Arguments of MAN I say than the Aâ—guments or Words of Man for that the Arguments alledged by tâ—… Protestant Answerer against the Real Presence are all of Man and nâ—… of God they are His Words and not the Words of God Whereas thoâ—… Absolute and Express Take Eat This is my BODY are the Words 〈◊〉 God and not of Man and He neither has nor can produce one Texâ—… to contradict them Wherefore I expect to hear of your Satisfactioâ—… and Declaration for the Catholick Faith in this particular and nâ—… that You behave your Self like those Frivolous Vain and Impertineâ—… Enquirers who when convinc'd of One Point mind it no more bâ—… desire to be satisfied of Another assuming as it were an assurance 〈◊〉 themselves that tho' We are right in the Real Presence we may be wroâ—… in reference to the Infallibility and if right in That such is their Ignâ—rance to think We Err in Praying to Saints use of Images Purgatoâ—… or in something else they know not what And thus like Mag-Pyâ—… they Chatter and Hop from Bush to Bush from Point to Point withoâ—… fixing upon Truth as they ought to do where ever they find it Wherefore I pray be Satisfied in This of the Real Presence or Prâ—pose your Doubts before You proceed to the Infallibility of the Churcâ—… or to any other Point of Faith in Difference betwixt Us and tâ—… Church of England for so You will be Stedfast to something and nâ—… be wavering and Carried away with every Wind of Doctrine bâ—… Fix your Standard among the Faithful and Encamp with the Host 〈◊〉 the Ever-Living and All-Powerful GOD for the Security and Eternâ—… Peace of your Soul Which Peace that You may Enjoy for all Eteâ—nity is Prayed for by Him that is SIR Yours in all Christian Duty N. N